Assembly Automation

Real-time integration of prototypes in the product development process

Bingjian Liu R.I. Campbell Eujin Pei
Article information:
To cite this document:
Bingjian Liu R.I. Campbell Eujin Pei, (2013),"Real-time integration of prototypes in the product development process", Assembly
Automation, Vol. 33 Iss 1 pp. 22 - 28
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01445151311294621
Downloaded on: 22 June 2016, At: 09:06 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 15 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 343 times since 2013*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 09:07 22 June 2016 (PT)

(2013),"Developing a business process for product development", Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 19 Iss 4 pp.
715-736 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-Jan-2012-0006
(2013),"Fully flexible assembly systems (F-FAS): a new concept in flexible automation", Assembly Automation, Vol. 33 Iss 1 pp.
8-21 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01445151311294603
(1998),"Virtual prototyping for customized product development", Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 9 Iss 6 pp. 334-343
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09576069810238682

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:235719 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Research article

Real-time integration of prototypes in the

product development process
Bingjian Liu and R.I. Campbell
Loughborough Design School, Loughborough University, UK, and
Eujin Pei
Department of Product and Furniture Design, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify the strengths and weaknesses associated with physical and virtual prototyping and propose
an approach that utilises a real-time integration of both methods through an automated process.
Design/methodology/approach – Following a literature review, the paper presents the results of a survey investigating the current use of
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 09:07 22 June 2016 (PT)

prototyping. It then discusses a series of trials that were developed for the proposed tool.
Findings – Physical and virtual prototypes are not competitive but rather complementary. An integrated real-time system would reduce cost and
shorten the product design process.
Originality/value – This paper provides recommendations on how real-time integration of both physical and virtual prototypes could potentially
streamline the new product development process.

Keywords Prototypes, Product design, Product development, Real-time, Integration, Prototypes

Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Prototyping is the pivotal activity that structures innovation,
collaboration and creativity in design (Hartmann and
Klemmer, 2006). Repeated, efficient and extensive use of
prototypes can make a difference in the successful entry of new
products into a competitive global market (Zorriassatine et al.,
2003). In broad terms, prototypes can be classed into physical
or virtual forms. They are created to finalise aesthetics and
ergonomics, as well as to test, evaluate and validate the
functional and technical aspects of the design (Pei et al., 2010).
In a conventional approach, physical prototyping plays a very
important role in new product development (NPD).
In particular, it enables a concurrent, time-oriented approach
and supports collaboration in teams composed of people from
different functions and backgrounds (Pei et al., 2011;
Vandevelde et al., 2001). In contrast, virtual prototyping is
a relatively recent concept in design; and the term first being
used in relation to virtual reality (Dai and Göbel, 1994).
The technology is a natural progression and an extension of
computer aided design techniques such as finite element
analysis. Due to its strength in reducing cycle time and cost,
virtual prototyping has effectively replaced physical prototyping
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0144-5154.htm
Assembly Automation
33/1 (2013) 22– 28
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0144-5154]
[DOI 10.1108/01445151311294621]
in several areas and will be used even more widely in the future
(Huang and Chen, 1999). Despite this, Grimm (2005) argues
that physical and virtual prototyping should not be seen as
competitive but rather complementary technologies.
By understanding how physical and virtual prototyping
technologies are used and how they interact with each other,
there is a potential to develop tools that enable designers,
engineers, manufacturers or other stakeholders in NPD to apply
them concurrently in design, development and validation, thus
achieving its maximum potential. The main challenge is to
develop a prototyping method that can deliver instantaneous
changes in both physical and virtual environments. In light of
this, the aim of this research is to evaluate the design implications
of using a tool that can achieve real-time integration of both
prototypes through automation. The paper begins by reviewing
the benefits and pitfalls of physical and virtual prototyping.
It goes on to describe related work, following which results of
a questionnaire survey and pilot trial are presented to specify
what the tool should incorporate. A potential implementation
scenario is then described to show how the method could be
applied to motorcycle design. Finally, the paper draws
conclusions and presents future research directions.
2. Physical and virtual prototypes
In the context of NPD, physical prototypes provide both
tactile and visual evaluation of aspects including form, feel
and surface finish, etc. As most products incorporate some
form of human interaction, this tactile advantage should be
seen as highly desirable, particularly when interacting with
customers (Campbell et al., 2007). In contrast, virtual
prototyping is most often used when physical prototyping

22
 Integration of prototypes in the product development process Assembly Automation
Bingjian Liu, R.I. Campbell and Eujin Pei Volume 33 · Number 1 · 2013 · 22 –28

application are impractical, impossible or inefficient (Grimm, Figure 1 Integrating physical and virtual prototypes
2005). Virtual prototyping allows the product to be replicated
and tested in a digital environment and often within a CAD
system to produce results. Examples of this include the testing
of tensile strength, fluid dynamics, kinematic analysis and
even visual evaluation. Virtual prototypes have the key
advantage of being faster (once the virtual prototype has
been created), more cost effective and easier to modify both
the prototype and test parameters. Hence, it becomes
desirable to adopt both forms of technologies within NPD,
since the strengths and advantages of one technology
potentially address the weakness and limitations of the
other. Gibson et al. (2005) proposed that physical and virtual
prototyping are valuable techniques that can be combined to
form a more powerful tool for rapid development of complex
products. This leads to a need for some form of integration
between physical and virtual prototyping. As stated by Jain
(2005), the integration of physical and virtual prototypes
should yield shorter development cycles, fewer late-stage
errors, and a higher return of investment.
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 09:07 22 June 2016 (PT)

For this study, “real-time integration of physical and virtual

prototypes” shall refer to the synchronised changes that occur
in both physical and virtual forms of prototyping. It is hoped
that through a real-time integration, the benefits of these two
forms of prototyping activities can be best used when needed
so as to reduce time and cost.
3. Related work
Research concerning the real-time integration of physical and
virtual models was initiated by Bruns (1998) who proposed
the concept of a “graspable user interface” that could combine
physical objects with a virtual environment. The system
requires the use of a “data glove” to pick up and move the
physical objects. The movements are then tracked and
replicated in a virtual environment that contains virtual
copies of the physical object. This system allows users to
convey changes that take place in the physical world into the
virtual environment; for instance making it possible for a circuit
designer to build circuits in reality and in a virtual environment
at the same time. However, the drawback is that this system is
not able to alter the shape of the objects and can only assemble
pre-defined objects. Therefore, the application of the system
would be limited to later stages of NPD.
Campbell (2003) further proposed an approach that would
enable the simultaneous creation and modification of two
analogous prototypes – one virtual and one physical. This could
be achieved through real-time sharing of data between two
different prototyping media as shown in Figure 1. The approach
was aimed at integrating both virtual and physical prototypes
to facilitate greater user involvement in NPD. In the framework,
both forms of prototypes are able to seamlessly cross over,
replicate and undertake modifications when required.
Parallel to Campbell’s approach, Anderl et al. (2006)
developed a tool known as parametric prototyping to achieve
integration for equation-driven (parametric) CAD models
and physical shape representations to optimise styling and
design. They defined parametric prototyping as a set-up of
physical mock-ups and virtual models that are linked by an
interface. The system comprises a physical mock-up that is
divided into several sections and each part is linked with a
corresponding component in the digital space that is
connected through a computer interface. Changes to the
Source: Campbell (2003)
virtual part can be relayed to the physical component by
means of electrical, mechanical and control mechanisms.
Similarly, changes to the physical part can be transmitted to
the corresponding part in the virtual space. When compared
to other technologies, the most important advantage of this
system is its bi-directional conversion. However, the purpose
of this system is still limited; restricted to only the styling of
outer components and the changes being limited to the
motion of the parametric parts in horizontal and vertical
directions. In addition, the virtual model is incomplete and
does not simulate the material properties, colour, texture and
environment all of which are essential in NPD. As for the
physical prototype, it cannot be used with product users to
test aspects such as ergonomics and usability. Despite all of
its limitations, the development of this tool still meets the
requirements of real-time integration between physical and
virtual prototypes such as data transfer between a virtual
system and a physical component, and the bi-directional
conversion of shape and size changes. No other directly
related research was found and it was postulated that the
design community’s exposure to this concept would therefore
be minimal. In light of this, the next section discusses a
questionnaire survey that was undertaken to elicit feedback
from industry on the potential usefulness of real-time
integration of physical and virtual prototypes. In addition,
there was a need to assess the impact of real-time integration
upon the design process, since all previous research had
addressed the technological aspects only.
4. Questionnaire survey and initial user trials
To better understand the use of physical and virtual
prototypes in NPD, the authors undertook a questionnaire

23
 Integration of prototypes in the product development process
Bingjian Liu, R.I. Campbell and Eujin Pei
involving 16 design consultancies and manufacturing
companies in the UK. The aim of this survey was to
establish the “real-world need” for prototype integration and
thus validate the research direction. The design consultancies
and manufacturing companies were approached on the basis
that they were using a user-centred design approach and
hence understood the importance prototypes in eliciting user
opinions about products. The main findings of the survey
were as follows:
.
all of the respondents were using both virtual and physical
prototypes in their NPD process;
.
14 of the respondents were able to identify limitations with
physical prototypes and 15 could identify limitations with
virtual prototypes;
.
half of the respondents claimed they required the need for
real-time integration of these two forms of prototyping; and
.
none of these had been able to do so because the practice
of simultaneous use of physical and virtual prototype was
seen as being in its infancy without any suitable or
effective methods to integrate them in real-time.
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 09:07 22 June 2016 (PT)
Taking a step further, a simple pilot trial was set up involving
four pairs of participants from a product design background
to evaluate how the integration of both prototypes could
help them in NPD. The aim of the trial was to establish the
feasibility of a dual prototype protocol involving a user and
designer. The participants were designers and engineers
working in companies, consultancies or academic
institutions. Strictly speaking, only half of the participants
needed to come from a design background, since one
participant in each pair took on the role of a designer
whereas the other acted as a user. For this trial, the user
participant was asked to test the backrest angle of a chair.
The chair chosen was a standard office chair whose backrest
angle could be adjusted manually. In addition, a new design
of chair was constructed in the Pro/ENGINEER CAD
system, where one of the key design parameters was backrest
angle. When changes were made to the angle by the user, the
CAD model of the product in the digital space also changed
by the designer (Figure 2).
Figure 2 The evaluation of the chair with both virtual and physical
models
24
Assembly Automation
Volume 33 · Number 1 · 2013 · 22 –28
From the experiment, the user was able to see how the profile
of the chair had been altered when the angle of the backrest
was changed (Figure 3). The results showed that the
simultaneous representation of changes to physical and
virtual prototype was more helpful for evaluating their
design. More importantly, because both models could be
adjusted, no further prototypes were required to be built, thus
saving cost and time, to an extent. The outcomes of the two
preliminary investigations showed that there was both a real
need and potential benefits for having an integrated approach
to physical and virtual prototyping for NPD.
5. Automated prototypes and trials
Based on the theoretical knowledge gained from literature and
findings from the survey and pilot study, it was decided to
develop a more comprehensive system that would better
integrate both prototype methods. As the infrastructure for the
chair prototype was already in place, a decision was made to
improve the test rig so that it would now allow modification of
the seat height, as well as the angle of the backrest. In the new
rig, the height of the seat and angle of the backrest could be
adjusted by the user pressing relevant switches connected to two
independent electric motors. A virtual model was rebuilt using
the Rhino CAD package to simulate the aesthetical aspects
of the product. Rhino was selected in preference to Pro/
ENGINEER because it was easier to drive the movement of the
model from external inputs. The digital model was linked to the
physical test rig by means of using the “control points” feature
embodied in Rhino. This feature enables the designer to select a
series of points controlling the shape of a surface and to move
them simultaneously in one, two or three axes, hence altering
the shape of the surface in real-time.
In order to build the “integrated link” between both
prototypes, components from a standard computer mouse
were used. The two optical encoding disc sensors of the
mouse were assembled into the physical model whereby
the horizontal sensor tracked the angular movement of the
backrest, while the vertical sensor tracked changes to the
height of the seat. This was done by creating two encoders
(one linear and one rotational) and attaching these to the seat
and backrest of the chair, respectively. When the chair was
moved by the user, the optical sensors would use the encoders
to “count” how far it had moved. The movement of the
physical model was transferred to the computer via the USB
interface of the mouse, whereby the two sensor signals were
used to move “control points” in the virtual CAD model
(Figure 4). Simple arithmetical and trigonometrical
calculations were used to convert the encoder counts into
millimetres and degrees for control point movement. Taking
several measurements and comparing them with the virtual
model, the dimensional accuracy of the movements was
determined as having a 15 per cent margin of error. Figure 5
shows how the experiment took place, where the participant
was asked to sit on the chair and had the option of adjusting
the height and the angle of backrest using the two switches.
At the same time, the virtual CAD model was projected onto
the screen to give the user a full view of the resultant
simultaneous changes in the chair design. The designer was
seated in front of the computer and could instruct the user
during the experiment, if necessary.
Eight pairs of participants (one designer and one user)
were involved in the trial. To fully compare the proposed
 Integration of prototypes in the product development process
Bingjian Liu, R.I. Campbell and Eujin Pei
Figure 3 Corresponding changes of the physical and virtual chair
2 1
3
Figure 4 Technical overview of the system
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 09:07 22 June 2016 (PT)
Figure 5 Setup of experiment
method with a traditional product testing approach (where
the physical and virtual models are tested separately),
the whole experiment was divided into two stages. In the
“disconnected” stage, the participants were asked to undergo
the trial when the physical and CAD models were
disconnected. At this stage, the user was asked to adjust the
chair height and seatback angle to comfortable positions.
After this, the designer measured the changes with a ruler and
goniometer and had to manually input the data into the CAD
25
Assembly Automation
Volume 33 · Number 1 · 2013 · 22 –28
1
2
3
model to update it. On average, the “disconnected” process
took 7 min to complete. For the “connected” stage, the user
was asked to follow the same process, with the exception that
the CAD model would now be automatically updated
while the real chair was being adjusted. This process took
about three and a half minutes to complete. Half of the pairs
undertook the disconnected stage first and the other half
undertook the connected stage fist.
All participants were then asked to complete a questionnaire
to elicit feedback from the trials. The aim was to evaluate
the impact that the real-time prototype integration had upon
the design process. Two sets of questionnaires were developed
and the questions for users and designers were different. The
user’s set of questions were concerned more about the system’s
usability and whether it would allow them to understand the
design better. In contrast, the designer’s set centred more on
the efficiency of the tool as compared to having two
disconnected methods of prototyping. The main findings
from the questionnaires were as follows:
.
the majority of both sets of respondents (seven of the
designers and all of the users) felt that the trial system was
easy to operate;
.
all of the respondents were generally satisfied with the
overall process of the trial;
.
seven of the designers believed the method would give
some help in speeding up design modifications;
.
all of the designers believed the method was a valuable
way of getting users more involved in design;
 Integration of prototypes in the product development process
Bingjian Liu, R.I. Campbell and Eujin Pei
.
two of the designers commented that the system would be
useful but were also concerned about the amount of time
and effort required to build both prototypes; and
.
most importantly, all of the respondents commented
that the system was an excellent and novel way to
simultaneously test the properties of both physical and
virtual prototypes, allowing instantaneous changes to
be seen.
The secondary purpose of this trial was also to identify
potential problems within the system and, in this respect, the
testing showed that most problems were technical, not
cognitive. For instance, the structure of the physical mock-up
was seen as not being robust enough and resulted in a lack of
accuracy.
6. Specifications for building integrated physical
and virtual prototypes
In order for real-time integration of physical and virtual
prototypes to be fully realised, it is important to develop a
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 09:07 22 June 2016 (PT)
framework that would define this concept. The framework
should meet the following basic requirements:
.
It should be suitable for products with a range of sizes and
complexity whilst recognising that not all products are
suited to the approach.
.
It should transfer all possible changes of the physical
prototype to the virtual prototype, including the variation
of linear dimensions and the modification of free form
shape.
.
The level of automation in physical prototyping should be
improved to further reduce the time.
Some technologies could be employed to meet these
requirements. For instance, motion capture technology has
the potential to overcome the multi-dimensional problem.
Widely used in the film industry, this technology can transfer
movements of actors in the stage set to the computer. This is
done by placing “markers” at key locations being worn by the
actor, usually at movable joints and then using this to detect
the movement of the person. For small sized products, a “data
glove” could be a key enabling device for such an application.
Wearing this glove and holding the prototype, the user could
move their fingers in relation to the prototype, which could
then be transferred to the virtual model instantaneously. This
novel method offers the capability to test hand-held devices,
as well as larger products such as furniture. In addition, the
use of automation can improve the overall system.
When these key technologies have been successfully
embodied and the integration approach is fully developed,
the approach could become a decision support tool for
product evaluation. In summary, applying this integration
approach will always involve the following steps:
1 Select aspects of the product to be evaluated.
2 Decide which of these are to be evaluated physically or
virtually.
3 Build the physical and virtual prototypes.
4 Link the physical and virtual prototype with appropriate
sensors.
5 Calibrate the physical and virtual prototypes.
6 Ensure that both are presented in a similar scale or aspect
ratio.
7 Follow a detailed testing protocol.
8 Obtain feedback.
26
Assembly Automation
Volume 33 · Number 1 · 2013 · 22 –28
6.1 Potential implementation scenario – design of a
motorcycle
As a form of transport, the design of a motorcycle is closely
concerned with aspects of styling as well as ergonomics. It has
been chosen as an example to indicate the application of the
integration tool. Each of the eight steps for implementation is
described in the sections below.
6.1.1 Product aspects to be evaluated
Motorcycle manufactures aim to develop motorcycles with
distinctive looks, ride and performance. This indicates that
the style, ergonomics and functional issues are critical
concerns for motorcycle design and manufacturing. All of
these elements should be evaluated simultaneously in the
development of the motorcycle.
6.1.2 Select aspects to be evaluated physically or virtually
Physical prototypes usually have the advantage in ergonomic
issues, while virtual prototypes are more advantageous to test
the aesthetics and predicting performance. In this case, the
foot rest position, seat height and handle bar position should
be evaluated on a physical mock-up of the bike, while the
styling and the paint colour should be evaluated virtually
through the use of photo-realistic renderings and animations.
Performance aspects such as aerodynamics and acceleration
could also be evaluated using virtual prototype methods such
as computational fluid dynamics and mechanical simulation.
6.1.3 Building the physical and virtual prototypes
The physical prototype would be in the form of a “mule” that
would be built mainly from standard parts but the elements to
be evaluated (foot rest position, seat height and handle bar
position) should be specially designed to be automatically
adjustable, probably using stepper motors. The virtual
prototype should be built on a surface modelling CAD
system, with mainly aesthetic factors in mind, such as external
form, material texture and paint colour.
6.1.4 Linking the prototypes with appropriate sensor technologies
When the physical and virtual prototypes have been
constructed and modelled, the next step is to link them with
appropriate sensor technologies. For the seat height, handle
bar and foot rest position, the movements would generally be
linear and so linear encoders could be used. For the seat
cushion which will have shape deformation, haptic technology
could be considered as a possible solution. This is where
“force-feedback” actuators would change the shape of the seat
cushion in response to rider weight and record their position
for display in the CAD model.
6.1.5 Calibrating the physical and virtual prototypes
It is likely that each element of the prototype would need to be
tested and calibrated separately. Finally, the whole system can
then be tested to verify if there are any issues in conflict.
6.1.6 Selecting the method of presentation
The testing of prototypes could take place in a controlled area
whereby the physical prototype could be located in front of a
large high definition display screen. This setup would be
similar to the simulators being developed by the Human-
Motorcycle Interaction research unit at the University of
Nottingham (Stedmon, 2010), which also show the product
in a realistic (driving) environment. An alternative would be
to use a head-mounted display unit, built into a crash helmet,
that could give the rider a stereoscopic “full-immersion”
experience.
 Integration of prototypes in the product development process
Bingjian Liu, R.I. Campbell and Eujin Pei
6.1.7 Finalising the test protocol
When the system has been correctly calibrated and a testing
environment in place, the validation can start by following a
pre-defined protocol. It should contain a list of components
that are to be tested; and how to operate both prototypes.
At the same time, the documentation should also provide
recommendations on how to operate the recording devices.
A questionnaire or interview for feedback should also be
designed at this stage.
6.1.8 Obtaining feedback from the participants
After completing the evaluation, feedback should been
collected by either a questionnaire or a face-to-face
interview, or if possible, by both means. The outcome of
the feedback will then be used for the next development of the
motorcycle design.
7. Conclusions and future work
In conclusion, real-time integration of physical and virtual
prototypes has shown to be a novel way of improving the
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 09:07 22 June 2016 (PT)
evaluation of products within the context of NPD. This system
considers three key aspects: first, it makes the best use of the
advantages of both physical and virtual prototypes; second, it is
compatible with most 3D modelling software that is commonly
used in NPD; third, it should improve the evaluation process,
thereby reducing time and the need for additional prototypes.
The user trials with an integrated virtual/physical prototype of
a chair showed that both consumers and designers found the
method to be advantageous. However, some criticisms
included the reliability of the physical prototype; and the
need to fully demonstrate an integrated system for real-time
industrial design development.
A more generic approach to implementing the method has
been presented and illustrated using the example of a
motorcycle design. A key consideration is selecting suitable
sensor devices to connect the physical and virtual prototypes.
While the mechanical computer mouse was able connect both
prototypes and achieve a simultaneous update, the drawback
was in its accuracy and more precise measurements are
required. The ability for users to evaluate simultaneously a
combination of virtual and physical prototypes would have
significant impact upon design practice within the NPD
process. It would shorten (or remove) some of the iteration
cycles in the process and enable a more holistic approach to
satisfying user needs. If taken a step further and combined
with augmented reality, then the users would effectively see
only one prototype and could evaluate this as if they were
using the actual product.
Finally, the proposed method only demonstrates a
unidirectional integration of physical and virtual prototypes,
i.e. changes in the physical prototype leading to simultaneous
changes in the virtual prototype. It is thus envisioned that the
next stage of this research is to achieve a bi-directional
integration of both physical and virtual prototypes that could
potentially involve greater use of sensors and robotics.
References
Anderl, R., Klug, L. and Mecke, K. (2006), “Advanced
prototyping with parametric prototypes”, Digital Enterprise
Technology (DET), Springer, Setúbal, September 18-20,
available at: http://ltodi.est.ips.pt/det2006/papers/Physical/
f102_PH4.pdf (accessed May 7, 2009).
27
Assembly Automation
Volume 33 · Number 1 · 2013 · 22 –28
Bruns, F.W. (1998), “Integrated real and virtual prototyping”,
IECON Proceedings. Industrial Electronic Conference, Vol. 4,
pp. 2137-42.
Campbell, R.I. (2003), “Real time integration of virtual and
physical prototyping”, paper presented at International
Conference on Advanced Research in Virtual and Rapid
Prototyping, Leiria, Portugal, October 1-4, pp. 31-7.
Campbell, R.I., de Beer, D.J., Barnard, L.J., Booysen, G.J.,
Truscott, M., Cain, R., Burton, M.J., Gyi, D.E. and
Hague, R.J.M. (2007), “Design evolution through
customer interaction with functional prototypes”, Journal
of Engineering Design, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 617-35.
Dai, F. and Göbel, M. (1994), “Virtual prototyping – an
approach using VR-technique”, Proceedings of the 1994 ASME
Computers in Engineering Conference, Minneapolis, MN.
Gibson, I., Gao, Z. and Campbell, R. (2005), “A comparative
study of virtual prototyping and physical prototyping”,
International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and
Management, Vol. 4 No. 6, pp. 503-22.
Grimm, T.A. (2005), “Virtual versus physical: will computer-
generated virtual prototypes obsolete rapid prototyping”,
Time-Compression Technologies, Vol. 13 No. 2.
Hartmann, B. and Klemmer, S.R. (2006), “Reflective
physical prototyping through integrated design, test, and
analysis”, paper presented at the Nineteenth Annual ACM
Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology,
Montreux, Switzerland, October 15-18.
Huang, C.D. and Chen, Z.J. (1999), “Virtual prototyping and
virtual prototype in control system”, Journal of Beijing
University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Vol. 25 No. 3.
Jain, S. (2005), “Integrating simulation and physical testing
leads to shorter design cycles”, Time-Compression
Technologies, Vol. 13 No. 3.
Pei, E., Campbell, R.I. and Evans, M.A. (2010), “Development
of a tool for building shared representations among industrial
designers and engineering design”, CoDesign Journal, Vol. 6
No. 3, pp. 139-66.
Pei, E., Campbell, R.I. and Evans, M.A. (2011), “A taxonomic
classification of visual design representations used by
industrial designers and engineering designers”, The Design
Journal, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 64-91.
Stedmon, A.W. (2010), available at: http://hcdi.brunel.ac.uk/
seminardetails.aspx?sid¼2 (accessed August 15, 2011).
Vandevelde, A., Van Dierdonck, R. and Clarysse, B. (2001),
“The role of physical prototyping in the product
development process”, Vlerick Leuven Gent Management
School Working Paper Series 2002-7, Vlerick Leuven Gent
Management School, Saint Petersburg.
Zorriassatine, F., Wykes, C., Parkin, R. and Gindy, N.
(2003), “A survey of virtual prototyping techniques for
mechanical product development”, Proceedings of the I
MECH E Part B. Journal of Engineering Manufacture,
Vol. 217 No. 4, pp. 513-30.
About the authors
Dr Bingjian Liu completed his PhD in Design and
Technology at Loughborough in 2011. His research interest
centres on real-time integration of physical and virtual
prototypes and he now works as a Lecturer at Qingdao
University of Science and Technology. Bingjian Liu is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: bingjianliu@
hotmail.com
 Integration of prototypes in the product development process Assembly Automation
Bingjian Liu, R.I. Campbell and Eujin Pei Volume 33 · Number 1 · 2013 · 22 –28

R.I. Campbell studied Mechanical Engineering at Brunel
University, UK, graduating with a BSc (honours) in 1985.
His time at Brunel was sponsored by the Ford Motor
Company and he worked with them as a trainee design
engineer for two years. He then moved to Rover Cars, again
as a design engineer, and was elected a full member of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineers in 1988. He moved to
academia in 1989 and has worked for the University of
Warwick (obtaining his MSc in 1993), the University of
Nottingham (obtaining his PhD in 1998) and, since 2000,
Loughborough University where he is currently a Reader in
Computer Aided Product Design. He has published over
30 journal papers and 70 conference papers, and now works
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 09:07 22 June 2016 (PT)
mainly in the field of getting users more involved in the
product design process. Dr Campbell is Director of the
Research School of Design at Loughborough and is Editor-in-
Chief of the Rapid Prototyping Journal.
Dr Eujin Pei is a Senior Lecturer at De Montfort University,
in the Department of Product and Furniture Design. His
research interests centre on additive manufacture, inclusive
design and design futures. Prior to joining the University,
he worked as a research fellow at numerous institutions
including Loughborough University, Brunel University,
University of Southampton and as a visiting scientist at Vaal
University of Technology.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

28
 This article has been cited by:

1. Andrea Serester, Gergely Hidas, Gabor Szogi, Peter GalambosTesting and verification through virtual product models: A survey
and look ahead 141-145. [CrossRef]
2. Mario Covarrubias, Monica Bordegoni. 2014. Interaction with virtual aesthetic shapes through a desktop mechatronic system.
Virtual and Physical Prototyping 9:1, 27-43. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 09:07 22 June 2016 (PT)